Dear Kathy,
Since you graciously agreed (in our recent conversation) to let me present you with some examples of the Bible’s problems, I decided to do it in this way so it would have its own comment thread. As I’ve said, when I was a Christian, one strike against the Bible was not enough to shake my faith — maybe it only seemed problematic, maybe there was an explanation we hadn’t uncovered yet, maybe the historical accounts were wrong, etc. But as the problems began to mount up, I reached a point where I could no longer deny the fact that the Bible had actual errors.
A couple of suggestions before we begin. Try to be as open-minded about this as possible. As you go through these examples, ask yourself if God would allow such problems to exist in a message that he wanted all people to accept and believe? According to the Bible, whenever God sent someone a message, whether it was Pharaoh or Gideon or Nebuchadnezzar or Paul, they had no question whom it was from. They didn’t always follow it, as we see with people like Pharaoh and Solomon, but they didn’t question the source of the message or what it stated. So why would God operate differently today? Why would he want us to be so confused about his message that we’re able to question whether or not it’s really from him?
Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you come to the conclusion that the Bible has actual problems, that doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. There are a number of Christians who don’t believe in inerrancy. And even if you lose faith in the Christian god, that still doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. A number of people, including several of our founding fathers, were deists. I have a lot of sympathy for that view and plan to do a post on it soon.
Some of the items listed here will have links that provide additional information, especially when the issue is too detailed to list here. I hope that you’ll check out those links, since some of them are quite significant points. And regardless of how this article strikes you, I hope it will help serve as a great springboard to launch you into your own research.
Some of the Problems
Creation
The creation accounts in Genesis do not match what we’ve learned through science. This isn’t shocking news, but it bears looking into. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory had nothing to do with my deconversion, but I’ve learned more about both since leaving Christianity. It’s shocking how much misinformation I had been operating under. Not to say that all Christians are that way — that was simply my experience. But the evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang are far more substantial than I had ever realized. Two good resources for learning more about these issues are the following (though I’d also recommend checking out the recent Cosmos series, as well as some of the PBS NOVA specials):
Another problem with the creation accounts is that Genesis 1 says that plants and trees were made on the 3rd day, while man was made on the 6th. But Genesis 2:5-9 says that man was created before there were any plants or trees in the land. Also, the 1st chapter says that man was created after all the animals, but the 2nd chapter implies that it was the other way around. It seems strange that such discrepancies would exist only a chapter apart, but there are a number of textual clues that suggest the first 5 books of the Bible were assembled over a long period of time from various writings written by a number of different people. Many scholars believe that Genesis 1 and 2 represent two separate versions of the creation story that were both included because the compilers didn’t know which was more accurate. Whatever the reason, there’s no question that the differences exist and are hard to explain.
10 Plagues
During the 10 plagues, God afflicts all of Egypt’s livestock with a disease (Ex 9:1-7), and it specifies that it would affect the “horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks.” We’re told that all of Egypt’s livestock died. But the later plague of boils was said to affect both man and beast (verse 10 of chapter 9). Maybe it meant non-livestock animals. But Ex 11:5 says that the death of the firstborn would also affect Egypt’s cattle, and in Exodus 14, Pharaoh pursues the Israelites with horses.
Hares Chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic. You can read more about this here.
Arphaxad
In the genealogy given in Genesis 11:10-12, we see that Noah fathered Shem and Shem fathered Arphaxad. At the age of 35, Arphaxad fathered Shelah. This information is confirmed in 1 Chron 1:18. But Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad’s son was Cainan, and he was the father of Shelah.
Where does Luke get this information? It disagrees with the Old Testament, so who should we believe? Some have suggested that Genesis and 1 Chronicles simply left out Cainan for some reason. But why would they do that? To further complicate it, how could Cainan have fit in there? Genesis tells us that Arphaxad was 35 when he fathered Shelah. Does it really seem likely that Arphaxad became a grandfather by 35, especially when you consider the extreme old ages that people lived to at that time?
Another explanation is that some copyist messed up when copying Luke and Cainan is just a mistake. But this is not much better. First of all, the error would have needed to occur early for it to be in all our copies of Luke. Secondly, are we really comfortable saying that we have the inspired word of our creator, but it got messed up by some guy who wasn’t paying close attention? To me, that doesn’t lend a lot of credence to the idea of inspiration or inerrancy.
Instead, the most likely explanation is that Luke made a mistake. This, of course, would indicate that he was not inspired.
Problems in the Book of Daniel
In Daniel 5, the writer refers to Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar 7 different times. Yet we know from multiple contemporary sources that Belshazzar’s father was Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. The same chapter says that Darius the Mede took over Babylon, but this person does not seem to have ever existed. Daniel says that he was the son of Ahaseurus, and in mentioning this, the author of Daniel indicates that he was thinking of a later ruler — the persian emperor Darius the Great, whose son was Ahaseurus. This post in particular goes into the problems surrounding the 5th chapter, but if you’d like to learn about the problems in the rest of the book, you can access each article in the series here.
Jairus’s Daughter
In Mark 5:23, Jairus finds Jesus and says that his daughter is at the point of death. While they’re on their way to the house, some of his servants find them on the way and say that she has died and there’s no point in troubling Jesus further.
However, in Matthew 9:18, Jairus already knows that his daughter has died, but tells Jesus that if he’ll lay his hands on her, she’ll live. This may seem like a minor difference, but honestly, there’s only one scenario that could be true. Either the girl was already dead, or she wasn’t. And if Jairus already knew she was dead, then there was no point in his servants coming to tell him that (so of course, they don’t appear in Matthew’s account).
The Centurion
This is similar to the previous issue. Matthew and Luke both record a centurion who asks Jesus to heal his sick servant. Matthew 8:5-13 says that the centurion himself comes before Jesus to ask for help. Luke 7:1-10 says that the Jewish elders went on his behalf, and then he sent servants to follow up. In Luke, Jesus never speaks to, or even sees, the centurion at all.
Hight Priest
In Mark 2:23-28, Jesus talks about the occasion from the Old Testament when David ate the showbread, which Jesus said was in the days of Abiathar the high priest. However, in 1 Samuel 21:1-6, it appears that Ahimelech was the high priest. Some have tried to answer this problem by saying that Abiathar was alive during that particular episode, so Jesus’ statement is still true. But that’s obviously not the intent of the passage. After all, we would correct anyone who said that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred during the days of President Barack Obama. He may have been alive at the time, but that event did not happen while he was President.
430 Years
Galatians 3:16-17 says this:
The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.
Here, Paul says that the law came 430 years after the promises were made to Abraham. But in Exodus 12:40-41, we see:
Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt.
If the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years, then there could not have been 430 years between Abraham’s promises and the law. God made the promises to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and as we read on through Genesis, we see that Abraham had no children at this time. Later, he had a son named Isaac. When Isaac was 60 years old, he had Jacob (Gen 25:24-26), and Jacob had 12 sons that produced the 12 tribes of Israel. Already, we can see that some time has passed since Abraham received the promise. Once Jacob’s sons were all grown with families of their own, they finally settled in Egypt. Jacob was 130 years old at this time (Gen 47:9), and this marks the beginning of that 430 year period that the Israelites spent in Egypt.
That means that the time between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law was actually over 600 years. So why did Paul say 430 years? I think it’s obvious that this was a simple mistake. He remembered the 430 year figure because that’s how much time the Israelites spent in Egypt, and so he simply misspoke. It’s not a big deal… except that he’s supposed to be inspired by God.
Jesus’ Birth
There are a number of issues surrounding Jesus’ birth. First, Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts contradict one another on virtually all the details, which you can read about here. Secondly, Matthew seems to invent an episode where Herod kills all the children in Bethlehem who are 2 and under, causing Mary, Joseph, and Jesus to flee to Egypt (instead of just returning home to Nazareth, because only Luke says that they started in Nazareth). Matthew does this in order to “fulfill” some Old Testament passages that actually have nothing to do with Jesus or killing babies. You can read about Matthew’s misuse of the Old Testament here — it’s quite blatant.
The Virgin Birth is one of the most famous aspects of Jesus’ story, and it was supposedly done in fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah. But it turns out that Isaiah was prophesying no such thing — he was talking about an event that was happening in his own time, and Matthew (once again) just appropriated the “prophecy” for his own devices. You can read all the details here.
Another problem concerning Jesus’ birth narratives is that Matthew and Luke both offer genealogies for Jesus, but they are completely different from one another. Worse, they don’t match the genealogies listed in the Old Testament, either. And Matthew claims that there was a pattern in the number of generations between Abraham and David, between David and the Babylonian captivity, and between the Babylonian captivity and Christ. But to get this neat division, he is forced to leave out some names. In other words, that pattern didn’t happen. You can read more about that here.
The Triumphal Entry
While not as blatant as most of these other issues, when Matthew recounts Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, he once again borrows from the Old Testament, but seems to make a mistake in his implementation. See here for more info.
Judas’ Death
Judas is well known for being the disciple that betrayed Jesus, but what’s not as well known is there are two different accounts of his death, and it’s very hard to reconcile them. According to Matthew, Judas threw his money down at the chief priests’ feet and went out and hanged himself. We’re not told where he did this. The priests then take the money, and instead of putting it back in the treasury (since it’s blood money), they buy a field to use for burying strangers. Because they bought the field with this money, it’s called the “Field of Blood.”
According to Acts, Judas bought a field with his money (we’re not told that he was remorseful), and he somehow fell down, bursting open in the middle and bleeding to death. The field was called “Field of Blood” after that because of the manner in which Judas died.
To make things more complicated, Matthew (of course) says that this happened in accordance with Jeremiah’s prophecy, but there’s nothing in Jeremiah that matches up. The closest reference comes from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.
These issues really complicate the notion of divine inspiration, and you can read more about them here.
The Crucifixion
There are several big problems with the way the gospels record the events of Jesus’ death, including the fact that different times of day are given for it, and even different days altogether. You can read more about this here.
The Resurrection
There are also a number of problems concerning the resurrection, some minor, some major. They’re too involved to get into here, but you can read all about them here and here.
The Problem of Hell
The notion of Hell is fraught with problems. It might even surprise you to learn that the Bible’s teachings on the afterlife change dramatically between the Old and New Testaments. I go into detail about Hell’s problems here, here, and here.
The Problem of Evil
Another huge problem for Christianity is the problem of evil, which I talk about here. This post also addresses the “problem of Heaven.”
The Bible’s Morality
While a number of people believe that the Christian god is the source of all morality, the Bible is actually filled with some monstrous acts that are either commanded by God, done with his consent, or carried out by him directly. I talk about some specific examples here, and I address some of the common responses to them here.
Conclusion
Kathy, there are a number of other examples that could be given, including the prophecy of Tyre that we’ve been discussing. But to me, these are some of the most significant and clear-cut problems. We could try to manufacture explanations for every one of these — some might be more believable than others. But why should we have to? If a perfect God inspired this book, why should it contain so many discrepancies? And honestly, some of these issues can’t be explained. They’re just wrong. The problems go well beyond internal contradictions and unfulfilled prophecies. There are problems of authorship, problems with the doctrines, and problems with the way the texts were written, transcribed, and compiled.
I’m sure you’ve spent your time as a Christian trying to reach those who are lost. You’ve always believed that Christianity is truth, and it’s the one thing that everyone needs. But could it be that Christianity is just as false as every other religion in the world? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you want to leave it behind? When one is dedicated to finding truth, they have to be prepared to follow it wherever it leads. It’s not always easy or popular. It’s not even a guarantee that you’re right. All it means is that you follow the evidence where it leads to the best of your ability. If you find out that you’re wrong about something, you adjust course when the evidence dictates. If God exists, and if he’s righteous, what more could he ask for than that? I’ll close with my favorite quote:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
— Marcus Aurelius
Finding Truth 
“Don’t miss me” – we’d at least like a chance to try —
I’ve never known anyone to comment so often and say so little.
LikeLike
“if other religions can point to some fulfilled prophecies it invalidates the bible’s prophecies just shows you haven’t studied the religion of Christianity.” – mike
@mike
not really the point, the point is that if other religions also claim to have fulfilled prophecies, but are not from/supported by god, then the fulfilled prophecies you claim the bible has is not evidence that is from/supported by god.
that’s why we’re waiting on the credentials or the evidence that you and kathy claim to have.
hope this clears up your confusion on the matter.
oh, and in case you missed/dodged this:
“John: 13:1; 18:28, 39; 19:14, 31, 42 (before passover)
Mark: 14:12 (passover)
Matthew: 26:17 (passover)
Luke: 22:7 (passover)”
can you and kathy see where these passages at least appear to be contradictions to some people?
LikeLike
“ROFL get me out of here before my sides hurt too much. Israel is prophesied to NOT have a king until the rightful one comes. But hey lets not get distracted now -your fearless leader has a comedy DVD to produce. Get going with how the nation of Israel never became a nation again . Since um….errrr,….ahhh…” – mike
@ mike,
then i have clearly misread these splendidly clear prophecies, fortunately, the good lord and the man jesus have placed you here to educate us. Please, if you will (or can), lay out the prophecies and explain how they fit so well and so clearly to the actual outcomes.
LikeLike
“I left a comment that is in moderation because it has a number of links in it. I forgot about the link limit.” – No, no, Ruth, that means you’ve been BANNED! Mike says so, and you know we can ALWAYS believe Mike! That’s why he had to change his name to TBlackadder, or something like that —
LikeLike
“No, no, Ruth, that means you’ve been BANNED!”
Ha! Oh well…I guess I’m just not paranoid.
LikeLike
“Please, if you will (or can), lay out the prophecies and explain how they fit so well and so clearly to the actual outcomes.” – also, William, we need to consider that Jerusalem was also destroyed by the Babylonians, at the beginning of the Babylonian Captivity, of which the Persians helped fund the rebuilding after they defeated the Babylonians and freed the Jews – to which rebuilding was the “prophesy” referring?
Also, one cannot leave out the possibility of pure old coincidence. “A” is not REQUIRED to relate to “B,” but can certainly be made to appear to do so by someone well-versed in the art of pretzel-making. I understand Mike has a kiosk in the mall.
LikeLike
If someone prophecies that a white buffalo would enter town, and trample the buildings into dust, consume the town’s water supply and lead his herd in retaking the west, joining with the antelope and would never be hunted again…
and then a white buffalo is born one day, walks into town and drinks from the lake that the town get;s its water from… wow… but, i still don’t think it fulfills the prophecy – there’s too much missing, and white buffalo, although rare, would still drink water – and without any clear timeline associated, it’s hard to tell what white buffalo fulfills the prophecy, even if the other details didnt really mean exactly what they said…
but, like mike pointed out, every other religion has fulfilled prophecies, and they’re not really from god, so why would the bible be any different (if it really had fulfilled prophecies)?
LikeLike
This just in – film at eleven!
LikeLike
While in other news —
5 states trying to make their kids scientifically illiterate
In the US, the battle to bring creationism and intelligent design into the classroom is alive and well. Ever since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial in which the teaching of evolution was found to be a violation of Tennessee law, banning the teaching of human evolution in any publicly funded school.
The battle finally came to a head in 1987 when the Supreme Court heard Edwards v. Aguillard, in which Don Aguilard took the state of Louisiana to court over a law that required that creationism be taught in public schools.
The case, which made it all the way to the Supreme Court dealt a massive blow to the religious right when the court ruled that teaching creationism in publicly funded schools was unconstitutional because the original law was specifically intended to promote a particular religion
A similar blow was dealt decades later when in 2005 when a US District Court ruled that intelligent design was not scientific and even encompassed creationism and teaching either to be unconstitutional.
So one would think that since both creation myths that are endorsed by the religious right have been struck down in the highest courts in the country that this debate would be settled. How one earth could we still be fighting the creationist proponents when they have been dealt solid deathblows?
According to the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), an organization that tracks anti-science bills around the US that deal with evolution and global warming, almost every southern and bible-belt state in the US has at the very least attempted to pass education bills that either remove evolution from the curriculum or make it legal for teachers to offer alternative theories to human origins.
The states fighting to pass these laws are predictable if you pay attention to any national politics, the more red a state votes, the more it fights to remove science education from its schools or at the very least, replace science classes with a form of Bible study.
So what states and bills have been the worst to science education? Here are five examples of states either enacted or relentlessly fighting to pass anti-evolution and or anti-science bills to change their educational standards to appease the Christian Right.
1. Louisiana
Louisiana seems to be trying harder than any other state to produce the most scientifically illiterate students it possibly can. Governor Bobby Jindal has overseen most of these bills and has endorsed them all.
Jindal even pushed and won to get a voucher program installed in the state that would allow public funding to be used for private education, including religious schools that taught creationism.
A 2008 proposal that was approved in the state allows teachers to, “[…] Supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner,” according the language drafted in the law.
The law clearly had evolution and climate science in its sights when allowing teachers to use other sources of information to critique scientific theories.
A repeal effort has been made under Senate Bill 175, in April 2014 it went in front of the Louisiana Senate Education Committee and the repeal was voted down 3-1, meaning that teachers could still skirt the federal law and use their own materials in the classroom against well understood scientific theories.
The failure to get SB 175 passed has continued to ensure those with religious power in the state control science education.
2. Missouri
Missouri recently advanced a bill, House Bill 1472, to its House that would allow parents to opt their children out of class during lessons about evolution.
According to NCSE the bill’s sponsor Rick Brattin (R-District 55) told the Kansas City Star (February 6, 2014) that requiring students to study evolution is “an absolute infringement on people’s rights” and that evolution is “just as much faith and, you know, just as much pulled out of the air as, say, any religion.”
Bills being written by politicians who know less about the scientific theory of evolution as the students they believe they are protecting, cannot be a good thing. States like Missouri are turning to politicians and not scientists when drafting this type of legislation.
Missouri even looks to take this one step further and has another bill, House Bill 1587, that is currently with the House Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education that would remove the ability of school administrators to prevent teachers from miseducating students about “scientific controversies” around evolution. No date has been set for the committee to discuss this proposed legislation.
3. South Carolina
South Carolina republicans want to “teach the controversy.” This creationist gem, a much laughed at and discarded argument was brought back into the limelight when Senator Mike Fair (R-District 6), a member of the states Education Oversight Committee (EOC) and long time opponent of evolution told the Charleston Post and Courier that, We must teach the controversy … There’s another side. I’m not afraid of the controversy.”
The proposal he was advocating at the time was supposed to revise the states science standards and require that students, “Construct scientific arguments that seem to support and scientific arguments that seem to discredit Darwinian natural selection”
The proposal passed the EOC with a 7-4 vote and went to the states board of education, which held a meeting on June 11, 2014. A number of scientists came to oppose the proposal and the only advocates who came to speak in the proposals defense were two speakers affiliated with the Discovery Institute, an anti-evolution organization that supports intelligent design as an explanation for life.
Thankfully the state board of education saw through the religious fog and rejected the proposal.
4. Oklahoma
Oklahoma faced not one, but two anti-evolution bills this year. The first brought forth in February, Senate Bill 1765, would have made it impossible for school administrators to mislead students about “scientific controversies”. The first bill died in the hands of the Senate Education Committee.
Shortly after, a second and similar bill, House Bill 1674, was proposed and even passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 70-6, sending the bill to the states senate. This new bill specifically mentioned “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning” as subjects which “some teachers may be unsure” about how to teach, according to NCSE.
HB 1674 however never made it to vote in the senate and expired. One can only assume a third attempt will not be far off.
5. Virginia
Another bill put forward to tie the hands of school administrators is House Bill 207. Like the bills in Oklahoma and Missouri HB 207 would allow teachers to challenge scientific theories and offer other alternatives and not face any punishment for violating educational laws that prohibit religious alternatives.
The bills only sponsor, Richard P. Bell (R-District 20), acknowledged to the Washington Post (January 29, 2014) that HB 207 would apply to such scientific theories such as evolution and climate change. Bell also admitted to another local paper The Recorder that he himself was a creationist.
The Recorder later publicly came out against the bill and said they believed it was a threat to the states scientific educational standards.
The bill however died when the House Educational Committee did not vote on the issue before the bill expired.
These five states are some of the top examples but they are not the only five, and in the US were evolution is not widely accepted this hurts the countries scientific future.
A recent poll conducted by Gallop showed that 42% of Americans believe in the creation myth as to the origins of life on earth. There is glimmer of hope though, because the same poll conducted in 2012 showed that 46% of Americans believed in the creation myth.
The biggest threat to the US education is the Republican Party’s refusal to accept scientific evidence as fact and turn every scientific claim into some form of liberal conspiracy.
While 42% is an improvement over two years ago it still shows just how far behind the US is to the rest of the developed world. Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and France all poll in over 80% acceptance of the theory. In fact, when a poll was conducted of European countries that included Turkey, the US fell behind every country except Turkey that happened to poll at 25% acceptance.
Both Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson have spoken out about the dangers of not teaching evolution, seeing that evolution is one of the foundations of science, especially life science.
LikeLike
Remember, William, that Revelations assures us (and who doesn’t believe the prophecies of THAT peyote-ridden mad man?) that once the Temple is rebuilt, next comes Armageddon —
For Mike and Kathy’s sake, we can only hope they’re raptured before that happens. I was really kinda hoping Mike would be raptured sometime last week, but that didn’t happen.
LikeLike
Kathy should be home from school shortly – I can’t wait, I’m all aflutter!
LikeLike
Where’s Kathy? She’s late! Somebody call in an Amber alert!
LikeLike
Come back, little Kathy – come baaaaaaack –!
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“Kathy, there’s a lot you obviously don’t know about your religion. I know that sounds rude — I really don’t mean it that way. Hopefully you’ll educate yourself one day. Until then, I don’t see much point in continuing this ridiculous back and forth.
I wish you all the best.”
Nate, first, I wish you all the best too.
2nd, I also agree with your assessment of our back and forth.. it’s
incredibly ridiculous. And of course you don’t see any point in continuing.. because
you don’t like where it is leading.. or, if you’re honest.. where it has led. At this point, I’m just trying to get an honest acknowledgement from you.
“”Kathy, there’s a lot you obviously don’t know about your religion. I know that sounds rude — I really don’t mean it that way.”
Constructive criticism is not rude.. but Nate, this isn’t constructive criticism because..
..you continue.. “Hopefully you’ll educate yourself one day. ”
Nate.. I’m HERE! What better place to get “educated”? But you, nor anyone else, has given any facts or valid rational reasoning that has any “educational” benefit. I’m doing my part.. you are the one who is failing.
I’ve presented an extremely valid argument to you.. and you’ve come up with all kinds of excuses, re: this thread, to avoid giving the honest answer.. “wherever it may lead”..
Of course you don’t’ want to continue.. I’m exposing the REAL truth of your blog.. Nate.. it’s not driven by a search for truth.. it’s driven by a biased agenda.
I’ve adequately demonstrated in my responses that my question is answerable. There is “evidence” for all the primary, widely known religions.. that we all know you ARE aware of.
I’m only asking you (REPEATEDLY) to give your opinion on which one you believe has the most evidence to support it’s claimed truth. Every doctor has “credentials”.. aka evidence for their “qualifications”.. but not every doctor is a good doctor or could even be considered qualified despite their “credentials”.. but regardless, there are “credentials” to acknowledge.
My question is NO DIFFERENT Nate, although you are trying desperately to twist it into something different. Again, I point out that your claimed identity of atheist REQUIRES you to have some knowledge of not only Christianity but the other prominent religions as well.. if this isn’t the case, then your blog has.. um.. very POOR credentials.
Sorry Nate, my question is a very simple, answerable question… and you’ve made it clear that you don’t want to answer it because you don’t like “where it leads”…
LikeLike
“I’m only asking you (REPEATEDLY) to give your opinion on which one you believe has the most evidence to support it’s claimed truth. Every doctor has “credentials”.. aka evidence for their “qualifications”.. but not every doctor is a good doctor or could even be considered qualified despite their “credentials”.. but regardless, there are “credentials” to acknowledge.” – kathy
but asking for credentials of being a truthful (from god) religion is like seeking medical dr credentials from 5 year olds – while some 5 year olds may be quite intelligent, nothing about them makes them credible doctors.
so what exactly are you asking? your question has been answered many times over. maybe we’re still not getting what you’re after. We dont see anything that would indicate any religion, that we have seen, is truly from god/perfect being.
Do you want to know which is nicer or which we’d like to be true if we had to pick one?
and doing your part? Kathy, come on here, you still haven’t provided your factual evidence and you still haven’t answered or even acknowledged many questions posed to you… it what way have you done your part? and part of what?
LikeLike
Aww, Kathy, I am SO glad to see you’ve returned safely! We missed you!
RE: “I’m HERE! What better place to get “educated”? – my thoughts exactly, which is why I relayed to you the information from William G. Dever , biblical archaeologist in the Levant for 35 years, born and raised in a Christian household by a minister and his wife, attended theology schools, and became an atheist after learning what he did about the reliability of the Bible, that there was no evidence that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel or Moses ever existed, which you declined to consider.
I posted the video by Israel Finklestein, Jewish Archaeologist in Israel, who demonstrated that much of the early OT was not true, according to the available evidence, which you refused to watch.
I outlined the Documentary Hypothesis, demonstrating how various parts of the first five, “According to Moses” books were written by several priestly groups, in various areas, at vastly different times, but never by Moses, then pieced together like a patchwork quilt by a redactor in 400 BCE, which you declined to investigate.
I showed you that the Noah story was taken from a small, actual flood in Iraq, 300 years before the Noah flood was supposed to have occurred, and that the biblical account even used some of the EXACT same phraseology as the “Epic of Gilgamesh,” a fictional account of the Mesopotamian flood, written 200 years before Noah.
I clearly demonstrated that the four Gospel writers were not who they were claimed to have been, wrote their gospels LONG after the death of Yeshua, if he ever existed, and none ever knew him.
So frankly, I can’t imagine that ANYone has ever had a better opportunity to “get educated” than you have. You can lead a theist to knowledge, but you can’t make her think.
LikeLike
Arch,
I don’t have time to read all of your comments right now but, here, you said:
“South Carolina republicans want to “teach the controversy.” This creationist gem, a much laughed at and discarded argument was brought back into the limelight when Senator Mike Fair (R-District 6), a member of the states Education Oversight Committee (EOC) and long time opponent of evolution told the Charleston Post and Courier that, We must teach the controversy … There’s another side. I’m not afraid of the controversy.”
“This creationist gem, a much laughed at and discarded argument …”
Right, because all you can do is “laugh at and discard” this argument. You can’t argue
it’s truth Arch.. so that’s what liberals/ atheists do instead.. they ridicule the point and the person making it. It’s liberalism 101.
See Arch.. here’s the problem with not teaching creationism as a possible explanation.. because otherwise, children are offered NO possible explanation… ZERO possible explanations.. this IS ignorance.. it’s blatantly IGNORING a fundamental question. Not only that, but the science that is taught in schools.. actually argues AGAINST the scientific laws of existence! So, Arch, you are perfectly demonstrating true ignorance.. you are SUPPORTING ignorance in schools.
Creationism offers the ONLY explanation for our existence. What atheists insist be taught in schools EXCLUSIVELY.. offers ZERO explanation. “We don’t know.. so let’s just pretend that we don’t know that we don’t know!”.. that’s why we should feel sorry for the pathetic “educations” children are getting today.. it’s all guided by extremely ignorant LIBERAL beliefs.. with lots of revisionism wherever “necessary”. It’s truly disgusting. Bottom line, the liberal minded overall, have little regard for honesty.. it’s just not that important.. not as important as forcing destructive liberal “dogma”.. aka anti God beliefs.
LikeLike
Kathy, you’ve been presented with a great deal of evidence. Much of it, like the history of the biblical texts, archaeology, etc, can’t be easily condensed into short blog comments. In those instances, you’ve been given links to articles, book titles, etc. But instead of taking time to find out more about these claims, you dismiss them add being “liberal atheist” propaganda. How can we help educate someone who refused to learn?
In the face of all this, you’ve put forth the assertion that even if Christianity has flaws, it’s still better than any other religion. Even if that were true, it has no bearing on whether your religion is actually divine, as we have repeatedly pointed out, but you’ve failed to recognize.
Do I hate the way the conversation has gone? Yes, but not because you’ve made any brilliant points. Instead, it’s because you have such a poor understanding of everything that has been discussed and show no signs of improving. I actually feel quite sorry for you.
LikeLike
William, I’ll respond to you comments later today..
LikeLike
Nate, your entire comment just supports my assertions of your deliberate ignorance and pride/ ego.
You, yet AGAIN.. AGAIN, Nate, BLATANTLY ignored my direct simple question. Our exchange would serve very well as a model example of the pride, ego and deliberate ignorance of the atheist/ liberal.
Nate, all of the links and sources and books and especially your opinions are FULL of bias. That’s THE point we, Mike and I have been pointing out to YOU, and which YOU choose to ignore.. making us feel sorry for YOU.
Mike has adequately disproven every point you’ve put forth.. and I’ve also give very valid arguments that disprove or seriously call into question your assertions.
But the most compelling evidence I’ve put forth so far, is pretty clear.. it’s the evidence of your bias and lack of objectivity. It’s been proven Nate… RIGHT HERE on you own blog.. I bet you’re hoping this thread will “crash”.. you’re probably trying to figure out how to do that right now.. you certainly don’t want to add a “part 2” thread even though there has been several requests.
Sorry, Nate, I’m not going to let up.. this is what honest objective searching of the truth is REALLY about.. TRULY going “WHEREVER IT MAY LEAD”…
LikeLike
“Mike has adequately disproven every point you’ve put forth.. and I’ve also give very valid arguments that disprove or seriously call into question your assertions.”
oh? where has he done this? he’s made a real ass of himself. That’s not me persecuting believer, but rather calling out a pompous and moronic jerk.
he’s ignored and jumped over many, many questions put to him. he’s made points that “die” doesn’t mean “die” and that many religions have fulfilled prophecies.
I’m struggling here, trying to figure out how you think this discussion has gone well for you or mike?
Further, regarding science in schools… what were you talking about? You want ID to be taught in schools? okay, the MOST that could be added is “maybe this was all created,” but to date, the only observable pathway leads toward what is being taught now – that is, if the teachers are presenting it correctly.
You talk about bias, do you only read about evolution from those who oppose it and trying to defame it? Isn’t that biased?
LikeLike
@ Kathy,
Creationism is not science. It is a belief that you know how existence is possible. If you want your children to learn about you are more than welcome to teach them that at home.
Is it a literal 6 day creationism you think should be taught? Is it by your Christian God whom you have relegated to only a 50/50 chance of existing or by a possible supernatural entity with no specific designation (I doubt that’s what you mean, btw)?
What might happen, Kathy, if one day the Muslim religion becomes the majority here? What if they decide they want Allah taught as the Creator? What happens then?
I’ve got no issue if you want your children to learn that your God created them. Children have been learning that from their parents and their churches for quite a long time. It has no place in a public school classroom.
LikeLike
“I’m struggling here, trying to figure out how you think this discussion has gone well for you or mike? ”
Kind of like the struggling that you, Nate, Arch, Ruth, Ark, Kc , Ron and who knows how many other atheists here are struggling to answer my question?? Like that?
You’re struggling for nothing.. you all need to literally FREE yourselves.. let the TRUTH
set you FREE. .. again… “wherever it may lead”.
LikeLike
Oh brother…
Your question had been answered many times over. NONE of us think ANY religion has credentials that point toward it being true. I’m afraid that’s the only answer you’re going to get from an atheist. In fact, that basic idea is tied up in the very word “atheist”
LikeLike
Ruth, I’m not claiming that Creationism as described in the Bible is science.. I’m not advocating an entire course on Genesis in schools. But it SHOULD be addressed as a possible explanation.. since, we have no other! And there IS actually science supported aspects of the Creation account. There is no valid reason to not address it.
LikeLike